Police Home Assault Informer Revealed, and Chesapeake PD apparently made deal with bad informer

[deepdiver]

imported post

Those of us currently in the conversation are not blaming Shiver and many of us have expressed our prayers and well wishes for his family. But we are also not blaming Frederick for making a "fog of war" decision to protect himself from what he thought was iimminent danger of death or great bodily harm.

The same way police sometimes in the "fog of war" shoot a kid with a hairbrush, civilians sometimes in the "fog of war" shoot an LEO breaching his door while he is asleep at night with nothing illegal in his home or his past that would remotely justify such no-knock warrant. It is very sad. It should lead to a total review of the way no-knock warrants are used to protect both the LEOs and the citizens.

I may be wrong LEO229, but I am convinced following these threads on this that if the scum-bag who gave the false evidence leading to this tragedy had instead, gone to Frederick's house himself and was the one bashing in the door and being fatally shot, we would be having this conversation. I think you would have made your "shouldn't shoot at someone you can't see" point and that would mostly be it. Also, I don't think Frederick would be in prison. And being that Frederick did not know that it wasn't that scum-bag or one of his friends breaking down his door, he was fully justified in defending himself.

 

[Nelson_Muntz]

imported post

Amen.

Let's mitigate the risk to the innocent by legislating against paramilitary armed home invasion.

 

[swillden]

imported post

Nelson_Muntz wrote:

Let's mitigate the risk to the innocent by legislating against paramilitary armed home invasion.

It'll make the police safer, too, even if it does rob them of some great adrenaline rush moments.

 

[Nelson_Muntz]

imported post

I DID say the "innocent". I didn't exclude the rush junkies!

 

[swillden]

imported post

Nelson_Muntz wrote:

I DID say the "innocent". I didn't exclude the rush junkies!

Good point!

 

[KBCraig]

imported post

LEO 229 wrote:

Just because you have pot plants in the garage does not mean you do not have scales and packaging material in the house.

Just because you have a shotgun in your patrol car doesn't mean you do not have weapons of mass destruction in your closet.

You've been the king of the non sequitur in this thread. Please stop. It's beneath you.

You also need to refresh yourself with the facts of the case. You've repeatedly said Ryan "fired from the top of the stairs", but this was a single story home.

 

[JeffersonDavis]

imported post

KBCraig wrote:

You also need to refresh yourself with the facts of the case. You've repeatedly said Ryan "fired from the top of the stairs", but this was a single story home.

AND..... When was the last time, a .380 could go through door to kill a man or when a detective executes a no knock warrant on a shedhe starts at the front door ofthe house? I really like the fact that there was no swat team for the assault, only a detective with a reputation in the department for being somewhat overzealous, and the second officer who was aforensic investigator, not an entry team. Ever take a forensic investigator with you through a door on a drug war raid? Ryan did what an innocent man would have done. He shot a man who wasn't in out in the yard but was already half way through the door. Should he have waited until he was shot at to respond? No. He is being railroaded plain and simple. And the department much like this other prick tell their favorite version of the story absent of any real truth.

 

[Neplusultra]

imported post

JeffersonDavis wrote:

He is being railroaded plain and simple. And the department much like this other prick tell their favorite version of the story absent of any real truth.

What I want to know is Ryan going to be able to counter sue and get some compensation!?

 

[LEO 229]

imported post

swillden wrote:

No, once again, YOU missed the point. This evidence did not need to be obtained quickly. The consequences of it not being obtained quickly were trivial.

Maybe what you're really trying to say was that this crime was too minor to justify the investment of limited investigative time?

Your opinion.

 

[LEO 229]

imported post

KBCraig wrote:

LEO 229 wrote:

Just because you have pot plants in the garage does not mean you do not have scales and packaging material in the house.

Just because you have a shotgun in your patrol car doesn't mean you do not have weapons of mass destruction in your closet.

You've been the king of the non sequitur in this thread. Please stop. It's beneath you.

You also need to refresh yourself with the facts of the case. You've repeatedly said Ryan "fired from the top of the stairs", but this was a single story home.

I read some place about some steps. It may be a single level home but there may very well be a set of steps to another minor level due to elevation.

And in regards to a shotgun in a car and a weapon of mass destruction at home... this is your straw man argument.

Having C4 in my possession along with fertilizer in my garage and no garden would be more appropriate. But a shotgun does not rise to the same level. If YOU believe that then everyone here has a weapon of mass destruction. But that is if you are applying the definition incorrectly.

Drugs in large quantities are most often packaged for sale. They need to be weighed and packaged. I have seen this first hand, What say you?

 

[SaltH2OHokie]

imported post

I was just talking to my buddy's brother-in-law who is a cop in another Hampton Roads city and he said that from what folks in his department have heard, this stinks to high heaven. He said whereas normally in a situation like this in both of his jobs (he was a Marine before a cop) that everyone knows, but no one really says anything...out of respect for one another...but this time he said folks in his department (geographically very close to Chesapeake) are talking about it openly, and very negatively.

Sad thing is, the kid probably still won't get off.

 

[JeffersonDavis]

imported post

SaltH2OHokie wrote:

Sad thing is, the kid probably still won't get off.

Chesapeake hired a sleazeball lawyer from northern Virginia to prosecute/ railroad Ryan but surely they can't fool a jury. The horrible thing is that he will lose everything he has in life while sitting in jail waiting for the jury to agree with justifiable homicide.

 

[KBCraig]

imported post

LEO 229 wrote:

I read some place about some steps. It may be a single level home but there may very well be a set of steps to another minor level due to elevation.

And in regards to a shotgun in a car and a weapon of mass destruction at home... this is your straw man argument.

I believe you're confusing the Ryan Frederick case with another that was reported around the same time, which did involve stairs.

The shotgun/WMD example isn't my "straw man argument", it's yours. I'm just making fun of it.

 

[swillden]

imported post

LEO 229 wrote:

swillden wrote:

No, once again, YOU missed the point. This evidence did not need to be obtained quickly. The consequences of it not being obtained quickly were trivial.

Maybe what you're really trying to say was that this crime was too minor to justify the investment of limited investigative time?

Your opinion.

Actually I was trying to tease out your opinion, and I apparently missed. I'll try again:

A small-scale pot-growing operation is important enough to warrant investment of investigative time. But it's actually TOO important to waste time investigating... the evidence must be seized immediately before it disappears, even if that means moving on weak evidence and using risky entry techniques. But at the same time it's unimportant enough that the officers wouldn't expect a violent response.

Closer?

If you'd just lay it out, without the usual ducking and weaving, I wouldn't have to try to guess

Personally, my suspicion is that the detectives involved in this case didn't think Frederick was worth investigating. They figured that he was worth taking down only because they assumed he'd be an easy target -- a small guy allegedly engaged in a minor, non-violent crime. They didn't worry about not having much support for the allegation because if they broke down his door and it turned out to be wrong, well, no harm no foul. The guy would crap his pants, but they had enough to protect themselves. On the other hand, if the bust went well, it'd be a feather in their caps, with very little effort on their part. And they figured the informant was probably on the level. So, they told the judge the informant was solid as a rock, got the warrant and headed out. Then they found they'd misjudged Frederick's willingness to defend himself. And his guilt.

 

[LEO 229]

imported post

swillden wrote:

Actually I was trying to tease out your opinion, and I apparently missed. I'll try again:

A small-scale pot-growing operation is important enough to warrant investment of investigative time. But it's actually TOO important to waste time investigating... the evidence must be seized immediately before it disappears, even if that means moving on weak evidence and using risky entry techniques. But at the same time it's unimportant enough that the officers wouldn't expect a violent response.

Closer?

If you'd just lay it out, without the usual ducking and weaving, I wouldn't have to try to guess

Personally, my suspicion is that the detectives involved in this case didn't think Frederick was worth investigating. They figured that he was worth taking down only because they assumed he'd be an easy target -- a small guy allegedly engaged in a minor, non-violent crime. They didn't worry about not having much support for the allegation because if they broke down his door and it turned out to be wrong, well, no harm no foul. The guy would crap his pants, but they had enough to protect themselves. On the other hand, if the bust went well, it'd be a feather in their caps, with very little effort on their part. And they figured the informant was probably on the level. So, they told the judge the informant was solid as a rock, got the warrant and headed out. Then they found they'd misjudged Frederick's willingness to defend himself. And his guilt.

Is that what you were up to?

I will give you this much..... I have NO IDEA what they did prior to obtaining the search warrants. None of us do. I have never worked with these detectives so I cannot say how they operate.

As far as doing an "investigation" I have been told a great many things they "should have done" and it is possible and does happen on some other crimes.

Some crimes need investigation to actually get the evidence.

Prostitution is one.... I cannot just take the word of an informant and break down the door looking for evidence. I am certain that as soon as I enter the "activity" will cease. So here you need to observe and document.

But in Ryan's case.... what do you expect to find? Knock on his door and ask him to sell an ounce? Check his trash till you find stems and seeds? Discarded zip lock bag packaging?

You have a "witness" who claims the evidence is inside. So there is no preparation required. You have someone reporting a crime in progress and you do not need to sit on your hands.

Maybe Ryan has prior charges for possession and this solidified that it was highly probable that he did have pot in his house. I do not know.

And I understand.... pot possession is s victimless/non-violent crime. But so are a great many other crimes. It does not matter... you want the police to enforce the laws on the books.... that means ALL OF THEM!

If you do not like these crimes being charged.. contact Richmond and demand they be repealed.

 

[doctork]

imported post

LEO 229 wrote:

swillden wrote:

Actually I was trying to tease out your opinion, and I apparently missed. I'll try again:

A small-scale pot-growing operation is important enough to warrant investment of investigative time. But it's actually TOO important to waste time investigating... the evidence must be seized immediately before it disappears, even if that means moving on weak evidence and using risky entry techniques. But at the same time it's unimportant enough that the officers wouldn't expect a violent response.

Closer?

If you'd just lay it out, without the usual ducking and weaving, I wouldn't have to try to guess

Personally, my suspicion is that the detectives involved in this case didn't think Frederick was worth investigating. They figured that he was worth taking down only because they assumed he'd be an easy target -- a small guy allegedly engaged in a minor, non-violent crime. They didn't worry about not having much support for the allegation because if they broke down his door and it turned out to be wrong, well, no harm no foul. The guy would crap his pants, but they had enough to protect themselves. On the other hand, if the bust went well, it'd be a feather in their caps, with very little effort on their part. And they figured the informant was probably on the level. So, they told the judge the informant was solid as a rock, got the warrant and headed out. Then they found they'd misjudged Frederick's willingness to defend himself. And his guilt.

Is that what you were up to?

I will give you this much..... I have NO IDEA what they did prior to obtaining the search warrants. None of us do. I have never worked with these detectives so I cannot say how they operate.

As far as doing an "investigation" I have been told a great many things they "should have done" and it is possible and does happen on some other crimes.

Some crimes need investigation to actually get the evidence.

Prostitution is one.... I cannot just take the word of an informant and break down the door looking for evidence. I am certain that as soon as I enter the "activity" will cease. So here you need to observe and document.

But in Ryan's case.... what do you expect to find? Knock on his door and ask him to sell an ounce? Check his trash till you find stems and seeds? Discarded zip lock bag packaging?

You have a "witness" who claims the evidence is inside. So there is no preparation required. You have someone reporting a crime in progress and you do not need to sit on your hands.

Maybe Ryan has prior charges for possession and this solidified that it was highly probable that he did have pot in his house. I do not know.

And I understand.... pot possession is s victimless/non-violent crime. But so are a great many other crimes. It does not matter... you want the police to enforce the laws on the books.... that means ALL OF THEM!

If you do not like these crimes being charged.. contact Richmond and demand they be repealed.

LEO229, I must say that I am amazed at your responses. I've got so much to say but it obvious you are more interested in protecting your fellow cops actions then protecting possible innocent citizens. You aren't going to change and that's sad. With the mind set of the crooks and cops the regular citizen is doomed. And this case, a person is dead, and you still defend the less then professional actions by the cops in handling this case. I know, by your thoughts, the home owner should have waited until he saw the whites of their eyes. Well most home owners aren't highly trained individuals. They suspect that if someone is busting a whole in their door then that someone is up to no good. And if the individual, like the old lady in Ga., had no reason to think the police would do such a horrible thing then why should anyone wait? If someone is knocking at my door I will answer. If someone is trying to get in my door I will try to determine why. But if they are busting down my door I will react with the same threat that they are forcing on me. Most people would, at that point, fear for their life or well being. People want so much to like and respect the cops but it's this kind of mind set that makes the regular citizen doubt and mis-trust our men in blue.

 

[KBCraig]

imported post

This event happened in January. Today, May 27, the preliminary hearing will be held, just to determine if there is enough evidence to send to a grand jury.

:shock:

In jail for 5 months without bond. So far.

http://hamptonroads.com/2008/05/hearing-today-man-accused-shooting-killing-chesapeake-detective

 

[LEO 229]

imported post

doctork wrote:

LEO229, I must say that I am amazed at your responses. I've got so much to say but it obvious you are more interested in protecting your fellow cops actions then protecting possible innocent citizens. You aren't going to change and that's sad. With the mind set of the crooks and cops the regular citizen is doomed. And this case, a person is dead, and you still defend the less then professional actions by the cops in handling this case. I know, by your thoughts, the home owner should have waited until he saw the whites of their eyes. Well most home owners aren't highly trained individuals. They suspect that if someone is busting a whole in their door then that someone is up to no good. And if the individual, like the old lady in Ga., had no reason to think the police would do such a horrible thing then why should anyone wait? If someone is knocking at my door I will answer. If someone is trying to get in my door I will try to determine why. But if they are busting down my door I will react with the same threat that they are forcing on me. Most people would, at that point, fear for their life or well being. People want so much to like and respect the cops but it's this kind of mind set that makes the regular citizen doubt and mis-trust our men in blue.

Sorry that you read into things the wrong way. I am sure some day your reading and comprehension skills will improve and you will have better understanding and openness about what someone is saying.

I was clearly pointing out the obvious from the LEO side... You see it as "defending".

I would suggest that you gloss over what I say in the future because I will probably NEVER say anything you could agree with.

 

[doctork]

imported post

LEO 229 wrote:

doctork wrote:

LEO229, I must say that I am amazed at your responses. I've got so much to say but it obvious you are more interested in protecting your fellow cops actions then protecting possible innocent citizens. You aren't going to change and that's sad. With the mind set of the crooks and cops the regular citizen is doomed. And this case, a person is dead, and you still defend the less then professional actions by the cops in handling this case. I know, by your thoughts, the home owner should have waited until he saw the whites of their eyes. Well most home owners aren't highly trained individuals. They suspect that if someone is busting a whole in their door then that someone is up to no good. And if the individual, like the old lady in Ga., had no reason to think the police would do such a horrible thing then why should anyone wait? If someone is knocking at my door I will answer. If someone is trying to get in my door I will try to determine why. But if they are busting down my door I will react with the same threat that they are forcing on me. Most people would, at that point, fear for their life or well being. People want so much to like and respect the cops but it's this kind of mind set that makes the regular citizen doubt and mis-trust our men in blue.

Sorry that you read into things the wrong way. I am sure some day your reading and comprehension skills will improve and you will have better understanding and openness about what someone is saying.

I was clearly pointing out the obvious from the LEO side... You see it as "defending".

I would suggest that you gloss over what I say in the future because I will probably NEVER say anything you could agree with.

We probably won't agree. Because I believe that individuals deserve to be treated with respect. You may say that respect goes both ways, but you have got to show respect to get respect. That's your job; you are the authority figure in a stop. You set the tone.

And I won't get into an s* match with you over my abilities. But I will say that with my poor comprehension skills I became an officer in a fortune 100 company running a major part of the data processing department. Somehow or another, this poor ole country boy did ok even with my so called disabilities. Enough said.

 

[Chkultr]

imported post

"Man who killed Chesapeake Police Officer during drug bust is charged"

Posted: May 27, 2008 11:19 AM EST

A preliminary hearing for Ryan Frederick, the man who by his own admission, shot and killed Chesapeake Police officer Jarrod Shivers, has ended with Frederick facing trial on two counts.
The court certified charges of First-Degree Murder, as well as Use of a Firearm in the Commission of a Felony, to a grand jury. A charge of simple Possession of Marijuana was nolle prossed. He could have faced Capital Murder charges.
Frederick has maintained since the beginning that he didn't know it was police busting through his front door. He says his house had been burglarized a few days earlier and he thought the same people were coming back to kill him. He's admitted he had a small amount of marijuana in his house, but says "it was nothing to kill a police officer over."

Moderator Edit: Cleaned up HTML code making it hard to read the text.